Skip to main content

About your Search

20121202
20121210
Search Results 0 to 5 of about 6 (some duplicates have been removed)
in governing his own republican conference. there's a hardcore group of people that in his conference that came here to tear down. they have never adapted to having to govern. it's extraordinarily difficult to get a majority of his conference to go along with anything. the speaker has to jettison the rule, the majority of the majority rule where he won't take up anything without a majority of the republican conference. he can get something strongly bipartisan, but it may mean having to take on that conservative clique in his conference and say, look, we have responsibility to govern. we have responsibility to do the right thing, and the american people are counting on us and we have to acknowledge the argument we made against any kind of tax increase on upper income families, we've lost that fight and argument. it's time to come together and compromise. >> let me play what senator ron johnson said on cnn just this morning regarding the president and what he says the president is not understanding here. let's play it. >> this president just simply doesn't understand that, and so as a result he p
to be the low tax small government party. the other party leadership proposes, wait for it, $800 billion in tax increases. it's noted that the democrats have celebrated the proposal put out by president obama. meanwhile, you have a number of republicans slamming speaker boehner. how would you describe his position right now? >> well, he really didn't win for losing. he's trying to say to president obama if i wanted topaz your proposal i can't do it. he's really truly between a deal and promise and getting the fight over with and a conference that won't allow it. i think what senator demint is saying and house republicans are saying to john boehner is, let's go over the cliff. that we can live with the sequester and we absolutely will not raise tax rates no matter what. what that does is eliminate all of the tax cuts and then there's a new fight in january to push obviously by the democrats to restore tax cuts for 98% of americans. and then that will be muddied by the need for a debt ceiling increase and the fight goes in to february. it's government at the brink all the time. we don't know how
are dysfunctional and cannot govern, et cetera, et cetera. in terms of dealing with the policy problem, which is you have this massive and growing debt, you have to bring in more revenues. there's multiple ways to do it, but critical ways to raise rates on the top end. it was what the election was about. republicans want to play the game where they think they get something. at the end of the day they lose worse if we go over the cliff. >> that's an interesting insight because you have alan simpson on the "today" show asked dp one side is a winner or loser off the cliff. here's what he had to say, chris. >> when you have leaders from the administration saying i think it's to the advantage of the democrats to go off the cliff or i think it's an advantage of the republicans to go off the cliff or the president to go off the cliff, that's like betting your country. there's stupidity involved in that. >> chris? >> well, listen, you know, i'm not saying it's necessarily the best policy course. i wish people could sit down and negotiate this, but at the end of the day think about it from the president's pe
the connection between this situation and the situation we were in around 1995 when there was a government shutdown. republicans thought they could drive this to the bitter end, and what happened? the american voters actually blamed them, the republicans, for what happened. i think it's a pattern in american politics when things happen that are, in effect, harmful government shutdowns, if you will, or breakdowns of process, the blame usually ends up on the side of the obstructionists in the republican party. i think there are enough republicans who want to win re-election who see that the strategy of obstruction failed them in this last election. they want to pivot and make a rebrand of the republican party. those are the folks that are the deciding votes in the republican caucus, enough to combine with democrats who shorten that margin in the house to get something passed. >> an interesting note, erin. congresswoman bass mentioned another possible strategy from democra democrats. earlier told nancy pelosi tsd if speaker boehner refuses to schedule this for a vote, democrats will introduce
is that you do, whether the states or federal governments do it or insurance companies, you have a lot of infrastructure spending as people rebuild from the wreckage. you had 20,000 less construction jobs last month. that's likely to be a 20,000-plus or more just to rebuild new jersey alone. you have that. by the way, we haven't talked about the defense cuts that go into effect on january 1, which is truly massive. those have a negative effect on the sector exposed to it and jobs there. >> really quickly now. i love having you on because you have the ability to simplify fairly complex questions. i'm going to give you one here. republicans generalliy argue tht raising taxes will hurt the economy. is there any clear indication there will be job losses if tax rates go up 2, 3 percentage points. >> no matter how editorials you read arguing that case, there's no clear-cut evidence there's any clear-cut connection between marginally higher rates or lower growth over the past 50, 60 years. >> the correlation is not definitive? >> yes. >> zachary, thank you so mesh. blake, always a pleasure. l
Search Results 0 to 5 of about 6 (some duplicates have been removed)